Are butterfly swords going to be featured in these rules?
In general, how many more Asian weapons are to be featured to expand the selection beyond Japanese peasant/monk weapons?
It would be great if the urumi used in Kalarippayattu would feature. It would be a nice addition to Vudra characters.
The urumi is already in Pathfinder rules :)
Our intent is to ship the Gen Con releases out so that they reach most US subscribers right around the time Gen Con begins.
Ugh. Was hoping to get it before I left for Gen Con.
Oh well, I plan to get two books anyways. One for signatures and the other for use. Guess I'll just have to use my 'signatures' book at the con.
The urumi is already in Pathfinder rules :)
Thanks for pointing it out. Haven't read the Inner Sea guide yet.
Still want butterfly swords, though! :)
Ugh. Was hoping to get it before I left for Gen Con.Oh well, I plan to get two books anyways. One for signatures and the other for use. Guess I'll just have to use my 'signatures' book at the con.
Last year they set it up so you could pick up subscriptions at Gen Con and save on shipping. Hopefully they will do that again this year.
Chief Technical Officer
|
Last year they set it up so you could pick up subscriptions at Gen Con and save on shipping. Hopefully they will do that again this year.
Ugh. Was hoping to get it before I left for Gen Con.Oh well, I plan to get two books anyways. One for signatures and the other for use. Guess I'll just have to use my 'signatures' book at the con.
Hopefully that'll happen again this year... but we won't know until we have a better sense of delivery schedules.
Here's a question appropriate to the thread:
In the PF Beta, the Barbarian was allotted a number of "Rage Points" which could be spent to power a rage and the abilities. Will we see the return of this (optional) system in Ultimate Combat or a Web Document?
I'd more suspect the latter, since existing powers would be a bit to collect entirely and assign, though the APG alternate abilities could just use the points cost of the powers they replaced.
Also, yes, I hear you all: "Barbarians and MATH?!?"
Just curious.
Alright, so I have to ask, and I'm sure it's been asked elsewhere, I lack the patience to sift through the threads and find it, but... Will there be an Ultimate Skills? Or something to that effect?
Alright, so I have to ask, and I'm sure it's been asked elsewhere, I lack the patience to sift through the threads and find it, but... Will there be an Ultimate Skills? Or something to that effect?
It has been asked earlier in the thread, and the response was something akin to "there are no plans for such a book at this time."
What about monks actually?
More background and information on hamatula and melekatha and their fighting styles would be great. maybe some archetypes on that.
perhaps even incorporate the ninja there. this could appiece a lot of people asking for ninja martial arts.
I'm dissapointed to see guns make their way into pathfinder. Modern, cyberpunk, sure... but not fantasy rp. They just don't belong.
If you think that guns don't belong in your game, the answer is very simple. Don't use them. Those of us who want to occasionally run a pirate campaign, or an alternate Earth game, will have the options we want, and you will not have lost anything except some pages in a book that you don't use.
I think firearms belong very well, as long as they are not a dominant technology.
I like the idea of hobgoblin muskets myself.
I'm dissapointed to see guns make their way into pathfinder. Modern, cyberpunk, sure... but not fantasy rp. They just don't belong.
I guess you've never read Gary Gygax's section in the 1e AD&D DMG where he gives conversion rules for Boot Hill (a Western game) and Gamma World.
But the rulebooks are used for far more game worlds than just Golarion, and the more they support ALL possible play styles, the stronger they''ll be overall. That's the theory, at least.If they just supported Golarion and that's it, then the rulebooks wouldn't be presented as world neutral books.
THANK YOU!! I've nothing against Golarion, I'm sure that with all the talented people it has writing for it, it must be filled with awesome, but it's not the world I GM. About a year before D&D D20 3.0 came out I began running and crafting a fantasy campaign setting of my own and while I have played loads of other games/settings during the intervening years, I have GMed this world throughout those years. When D20 came out, my players and I migrated from 2nd Ed to 3E, then to 3.5E, and I'm now running my fifth long term campaign in my homebrew, this time using Pathfinder.
With every evolution of my setting, I've been VERY selective in what elements from the rules we're currently using gets incorporated into my game. After all, I'm steering the direction of my setting and every inclusion can potentially change the character of that world. I expect that I'll continue to use my setting for years to come with no guarantee that in 10 years time I'll be running it under Pathfinder, thus I GREATLY value the non-setting specific material in the base books.
Leave the world-specific material where it belongs, in the world books. One of the (few) nitpicks I had against the APG was that the Campaign Character Traits were presented in such a Golarion-specific manner, making them unusable in my campaign. I of course have been creating campaign traits for my setting, but a more setting-neutral approach in a setting-neutral book would have been preferred. I hope that the designers continue to remember that any RPG system must be usable in many settings, both homebrew'd and commercial, not just as the rules for its own house setting. Please continue to support those who enjoy worldbuilding as much as roleplaying.
The infiltrator is in Ultimate Magic.
The description for a product is usually written over a month before we do the outline for the book. In the case of UC, the infiltrator sounded like a good idea, but when we did the outline we realized the infiltrator was slated for UM, so it was left out of the UC outline.
Will Ultimate Combat feature a mass combat rules system?
I notice the ISB-number is still TBD. Any ETA on that?
You're fast there James ;) I only had that post up for half a minute before I reread seeker's last reply and decided I was being redundant.
I completely look forward to what's in the book regardless of what the classes or archtypes turn out to be. Maybe you'll even toss in a few of the more popular Round 2 entries from the RPG Superstar *wink wink nudge nudge*
Sidenote; "Seven Samurai" is one of the best movies. For those of you who may not know, it is also available on Netflix Instant Watch!
Truer words were never spoken. I've always wanted to make a character like Blondie or Angel Eyes. My DM knows this & told me asap that the pistol & rifles, although rare had made an appearance in the Pathfinder settings, which promptly brought me back into the fold of gaming again. I simply hope people take it for what its for, an amazing new resource of flavor that can be added to an existing campaign. Keep up the good work.
"Who's your huckleberry"
~Doc Holiday
Okay so, Ultimate Magic has shipped, and it gets one last preview next week.
After that are we going to start seeing previews for this book?
If so roll on the list of archetypes! I really want to see waht on offer. Especially alternative, non mounted cavaliers.
|
Okay so, Ultimate Magic has shipped, and it gets one last preview next week.
After that are we going to start seeing previews for this book?
If so roll on the list of archetypes! I really want to see waht on offer. Especially alternative, non mounted cavaliers.
Hear hear! Hound master cavalier! New orders!
Would actually love to see a build oriented around charging on foot or even Spring Attacking... Anime slashes for the Samurai and Cavalier.
Also, a Falconer would be epic... though I guess that's sort of a ranger thing, it has such a nobleman vibe to it.
Just... We can haz moar Cavalier?
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
What about monks actually?
More background and information on hamatula and melekatha and their fighting styles would be great. maybe some archetypes on that.
perhaps even incorporate the ninja there. this could appiece a lot of people asking for ninja martial arts.
There is definitely going to be some cool monk stuff in this book.
That is all. :)
With all the complaints and whining on the Ninja forum, I fear this book will have one thing I'll extremely hate --- a nerfed Ninja class, or worse, a stupid Rogue archetype :(
Is Paizo planning to release the final draft of the Samurai and Ninja before going to print to clear up any messes? I, for sure, would like to see what they do for the Ninja before they run it, so they can make changes to it before they rile up a lot of angry Ninja fans.
@Razz: that is a silly statement: no matter how they approach it, there'll be angry ninja fans (and detractors). Why don't you simply have faith? The magus turned out awesome.
My only gripe about this book is that from the product description of it, not only do wizards and sorcerers get combat-oriented archetypes (Wut), but also combat-oriented spells (Aren't most of them?)
Didn't casters just get a nice boost from UM? Do they really need more help from UC? Let's work on helping the meattanks with the tiny metal sticks do more than just move and attack (And any combination of those two options) before we help the squishy casters more.
My only gripe about this book is that from the product description of it, not only do wizards and sorcerers get combat-oriented archetypes (Wut), but also combat-oriented spells (Aren't most of them?)
Didn't casters just get a nice boost from UM? Do they really need more help from UC? Let's work on helping the meattanks with the tiny metal sticks do more than just move and attack (And any combination of those two options) before we help the squishy casters more.
I agree here. If I see any significant caster stuff in a book about melee characters, I can't blame a lot of people claiming that this is a caster edition.
I suppose that spells for rangers, paladins, and arguably bards (being sort of a jack-of-all-trades) are somewhat acceptable, but wasn't that stuff supposed to be in the book specifically about magic?
The key thing for me is that Ultimate Magic should have options for everyone who is involved with Magic. That book did that job beautifully, even adding in some fun stuff for Monks.
On the same note, my expectation of a book called Ultimate Combat is that it should include options for everyone who is involved in combat. Which, essentially, is everyone. Therefore, this book's description is giving me nothing but positive vibes. Thanks, Paizo!
The key thing for me is that Ultimate Magic should have options for everyone who is involved with Magic. That book did that job beautifully, even adding in some fun stuff for Monks.
On the same note, my expectation of a book called Ultimate Combat is that it should include options for everyone who is involved in combat. Which, essentially, is everyone. Therefore, this book's description is giving me nothing but positive vibes. Thanks, Paizo!
Still, the focus should be on melee characters in UC. Or should Paizo's next book be Ultimate Melee to differentiate everyone who doesn't have magic?
Still, the focus should be on melee characters in UC. Or should Paizo's next book be Ultimate Melee to differentiate everyone who doesn't have magic?
No disrespect intended, but I guess I just don't understand where your expectations came from. This has been the product description for Ultimate Combat since it was first announced, months and months ago. There's never been any claim that this would be a melee-focused book. It sounds to me like, if anything, you should be starting a thread elsewhere on the forum stating a case for Paizo to make the product you're looking for. As it stands, the product description has exactly what I would want in a book called Ultimate Combat. But that's just my opinion.
With all the complaints and whining on the Ninja forum, I fear this book will have one thing I'll extremely hate --- a nerfed Ninja class, or worse, a stupid Rogue archetype :(
Is Paizo planning to release the final draft of the Samurai and Ninja before going to print to clear up any messes? I, for sure, would like to see what they do for the Ninja before they run it, so they can make changes to it before they rile up a lot of angry Ninja fans.
<shrug> I already promised my Ninja PC player that he could keep the playtest version for our running campaign, as it seemed well done and balanced to me. He also can use the finished version if he so likes, but it is up to him.
|
I just hope it's not too late to throw out one more (among many) wishful request to change the name of the "Gunslinger" to something more genre appropriate, such as "Musketeer" or "Pistoleer." Pretty please?
Oh, and in regard to the Ninja, I'm in agreement with others lamentations here. From the preview, it looks like nothing that can't be handled with existing and new rogue talents, and a little archetype-building. I wonder if the "final product" will still pretend to be a separate class with the current mechanics, or if it will actually have a unique build.
I really don't understand those people who complain about guns in a fantasy setting. Fantasy means 'magic' and such exists in the setting, it doesn't mean 'middle ages but without technology'. Steampunk is fantasy, and there's guns. There's 'urban fantasy' which is set in a more modern period. There's historical fantasy.
Gunpowder and the advance of technology happens, even in 'fantasy' settings. Worlds evolve, and there should be nothing wrong with introducing gunpowder or any other advancements in society that we've seen.
Hell, if you're going with 'middle ages', hit some history books or the web, and look at what kind of technology existed in different parts of the world - you'll be surprised at what you can find.
|
+1 to LaHaise's comment.
Moving beyond that, though I know my say isn't much unless everyone else agrees, but I'm still hoping for something more to come from the Ninja and Samurai. As is, the Ninja is almost good for being what it is, but I'd like to see it revised a little more to where it falls a bit more into balance. Maybe I missed something.
As for the Samurai, for me, personally, I don't see ANY difference between a Samurai and his alternate persona, the Cavalier. Maybe its just me, but I don't see enough there to warrant separating the two and I believe that there should be. Right now, I think I could just as easily create a Cavalier and call it a Samurai.
However! I am and always have been a Paizo supporter, so I know that when Ultimate Combat comes out, I doubt I'll be displeased.
I also hope you change the deeds to being selectable much like Rogue Talents, Magus Arcanas, Alchemist Discoveries, etc., as it would make the class so much more customizable for individuals. Three more months and I suppose I'll see.
Love the work you guys are doing, so thank you for the hard work.
Three cheers for Paizo anyone?
All this discussion about gunslingers and ninjas....Am I the only one excited for the vehicle combat rules? (AIRSHIPS!)
Nope, but then I'm excited about every bullet point in the product description. :D
I just really really really have my fingers crossed that they decided against making ninja a rogue archetype.
It's been stated on the boards that they were considering making it an archetype for no other reason than to prevent multiclassing with rogue, and that sort of rationale makes me a bit unhappy, as it's hard to justify for in-game reasons.
I just really really really have my fingers crossed that they decided against making ninja a rogue archetype.
It's been stated on the boards that they were considering making it an archetype for no other reason than to prevent multiclassing with rogue, and that sort of rationale makes me a bit unhappy, as it's hard to justify for in-game reasons.
The playtest as it as a rogue alternate class, not an archetype (more changes than an archetype), and when they decided to not do that with gunslinger, gunslinger got a round 2. I haven't seen one for the ninja (or any real reason to not have it as a variant rogue, which is all I've ever used for one). You should check out the playtest document before you call bad on it being an archetype (I'm sure there are some changes between the playtest and the final product, but I doubt it's changing a huge amount).